Skill flagged — suspicious patterns detected

ClawHub Security flagged this skill as suspicious. Review the scan results before using.

Workspace

v1.2.0

Automates project inspection and iteration by analyzing from user, product, project, and tech perspectives to continuously improve code quality and delivery.

0· 84· 1 versions· 0 current· 0 all-time· Updated 7h ago· MIT-0
byGao.QiLin@relunctance

Install

openclaw skills install hawk-bridge-v2

Auto-Evolve v4.4 (build 57fe0d7)

Four-perspective automated inspection and iteration manager.

Make your projects continuously better — automatically.


Core Philosophy

auto-evolve is not just a code scanner — it's a巡检伙伴 that thinks like a human.

On each scan, auto-evolve simulates receiving a Feishu message:

"What else can this project improve? Any shortcomings?"

It then examines the project from four perspectives, forming real opinions — not mechanically listing issues.


Scan Workflow (v4.0)

auto-evolve scan
    │
    ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Step 1: project-standard project type detection      │
│  Detects: Skill / CLI / Python Library / Web / ...  │
│  Determines perspective weights + inspection focus     │
└─────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┘
                      ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Step 2: Four-perspective inspection               │
│                                                      │
│  👤 USER    → user/user-perspective.md (criteria) │
│  📦 PRODUCT → product-requirements.md (criteria)  │
│  🏗 PROJECT → project-inspection.md (criteria)     │
│  ⚙️ TECH   → code-standards.md (criteria)       │
└─────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┘
                      ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Step 3: project-standard reference docs            │
│  Used as evaluation criteria, output grouped report  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                      ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Step 4: Execute / Notify / Record to learnings    │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Relationship with project-standard

ComponentRole
project-standardDefines taxonomy + four-perspective framework + reference docs (judging criteria)
auto-evolveLoads standards, runs inspection, records learnings, executes improvements

Four-Perspective Framework

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│              auto-evolve Inspection Framework v4.0    │
├──────────────┬──────────────────┬───────────────────┤
│   User      │     Product      │     Project       │    Tech        │
│  "Usable?"  │ "Delivered?"    │   "Healthy?"     │  "Clean?"      │
├──────────────┼──────────────────┼───────────────────┼──────────────────┤
│ CLI design  │ Feature complete │ Learnings closed  │ Code quality   │
│ Learning    │ Promise kept     │ Scan history     │ Architecture  │
│ Errors      │ Pain resolved   │ Config rational  │ Test coverage  │
│ Fault tol.  │ Docs match code │ Dependency health│ Performance   │
└──────────────┴──────────────────┴───────────────────┴──────────────────┘

Four Perspectives Detail

👤 User Perspective

Core question: Is it pleasant to use?

AskFinds
CLI designNon-intuitive flags, missing defaults
Learning curveHow long for a newcomer?
Error messagesMachine-speak vs human-speak
Fault toleranceWhat on partial failure?
WorkflowSteps per operation?

📦 Product Perspective

Core question: Does it deliver what it promises?

AskFinds
README promisesFeatures claimed but not built
Pain points❌-marked issues still broken
Feature completenessHalf-baked features
Docs consistencyDocs ≠ code

🏗 Project Perspective

Core question: Is it managed well?

AskFinds
Learnings loopPrevious findings tracked?
Scan rhythmRegular schedule?
Config rationalityOver/under-configured?
Dependency healthOutdated deps? Known CVEs?

⚙️ Tech Perspective

Core question: Is the code healthy?

AskFinds
Code qualityDuplicates, long functions
ArchitectureModule coupling
Test coverageCore logic tested?
Performance/securityBottlenecks, vulnerabilities

Note: Tech is the lowest priority — it's important but should not overshadow product truth.


Scan Output Format

🔍 auto-evolve Inspection Report — soul-force
Generated: 2026-04-05 22:30

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
👤 User Perspective ★★★★★
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
  1. 🚨 Impact 0.7
     review command lacks --dry-run, users think it's safe but it writes files
     → Suggestion: Add --dry-run support to review

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
📦 Product Perspective ★★★★
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
  1. 🚨 Impact 0.8
     README promises "LLM fallback" but code has no fallback
     API failure = tool failure
     → Suggestion: Implement keyword-based rule engine as fallback

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
⚙️ Tech Perspective ★★
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
  [opt] 🟡 duplicate_code: SoulForgeConfig init repeated 15 times

Commands

scan

# Scan all configured repos
python3 auto-evolve.py scan

# Single repo scan
python3 auto-evolve.py scan --repo /path/to/repo

# Preview mode (no execution)
python3 auto-evolve.py scan --dry-run

# With specific persona memory
python3 auto-evolve.py scan --recall-persona master

confirm / reject / approve

python3 auto-evolve.py confirm
python3 auto-evolve.py reject 2 --reason "too risky"
python3 auto-evolve.py approve 1,3

repo-add / repo-list

python3 auto-evolve.py repo-add ~/.openclaw/workspace/skills/hawk-bridge --type skill
python3 auto-evolve.py repo-list

schedule

python3 auto-evolve.py schedule --every 168
python3 auto-evolve.py schedule --suggest

learnings

python3 auto-evolve.py learnings
python3 auto-evolve.py learnings --type rejections
python3 auto-evolve.py learnings --summary   # v4.3: summary view

trends (v4.3)

python3 auto-evolve.py trends --repo soul-force  # Scan trend for a project
python3 auto-evolve.py trends --all              # All projects

Configuration

~/.auto-evolverc.json

{
  "mode": "semi-auto",
  "full_auto_rules": {
    "execute_low_risk": true,
    "execute_medium_risk": false,
    "execute_high_risk": false
  },
  "schedule_interval_hours": 168,
  "repositories": [
    {
      "path": "/path/to/repo",
      "type": "skill",
      "visibility": "public",
      "auto_monitor": true
    }
  ]
}

LLM Integration

auto-evolve uses OpenClaw-configured LLM (no separate API key needed).

Priority: OPENAI_API_KEY / MINIMAX_API_KEY env vars, or openclaw config get llm.


Iteration Storage

.auto-evolve/
  .iterations/
    {id}/
      manifest.json        -- metadata + findings
      plan.md             -- execution plan
      pending-review.json -- items pending review
      report.md           -- execution report
      metrics.json        -- iteration metrics
  .learnings/
    approvals.json       -- approved changes
    rejections.json      -- rejected changes + reasons

Version tags

latestvk971thhyz8hrxtgxn1amew9njx84mnpy